What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Official Donald Trump for President thread (4 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ilov80s said:
There's 2 pieces there. One is that they aren't accurately keeping their books. That's not frivolous. The other is that they have been hiding knowledge that they are contributing to climate change for 40 years. That's like cigarette companies hiding the link to cancer. It's also being dishonest to investors since it's hiding a risk to the future of the industry. 
Click to expand...
Yep - I just noted the one.  Marking oil reserves to market seems logical and I can see the SEC getting their panties in a twist over that.  But climate change?  That can be rehashed over and over, but suffice it to say that models built upon what we know about climate change have been an abject failure.  To then accuse a company of not seeing what the best scientists haven't been able to accurately predict is frivolous.  Politically correct witch hunt.

 
Ilov80s said:
I would think. I don't know what kind of SoS he will make. Hard to say since he has no public service. All I really know about him is that he has billions tied up with Russia and stands to really profit from his new position. I am sure they will lift the sanctions against Russia. 
Click to expand...
T-Rex is known as a deal maker.  He has no public service but I think diplomatic experience working with world leaders.

 
Sand said:
Then why did we draw the line to begin with?  Why bother sticking our nose in when we had no intention of following through?  Why damage our reputation like that?

Still questions that have no good answers.  Easily the most embarrassing foreign policy decision over the last 8 years (not the worst - that goes to the creation of the power vacuum in Iraq with the pullout).
Click to expand...
The US was doing pretty well with Syria through 2014. There was real hope that a Free Syria state could be created and/or Assad would step down. Assad was losing. Fast forward to 2015 when Assad becomes a client state of Russia and gets protection. The US hands are effectively tied once the Russians got boots on the ground in Syria.

 
saintfool said:
The US was doing pretty well with Syria through 2014. There was real hope that a Free Syria state could be created and/or Assad would step down. Assad was losing. Fast forward to 2015 when Assad becomes a client state of Russia and gets protection. The US hands are effectively tied once the Russians got boots on the ground in Syria.
Click to expand...
So basically, we spent $2.5 Trillion and thousands of lives over 13 years (not to count the extra $3-4T in veteran benefits over the next few decades) and the Russians swoops in and mopped up at the end?

 
Sand said:
ffldrew said:
We've always ceded influence to Russia in Syria - since the 1970's. 
Click to expand...
Then why did we draw the line to begin with?  Why bother sticking our nose in when we had no intention of following through?  Why damage our reputation like that?

Still questions that have no good answers.  Easily the most embarrassing foreign policy decision over the last 8 years (not the worst - that goes to the creation of the power vacuum in Iraq with the pullout).
Click to expand...
First of all - the problem was going in there to begin with - then it was the Bush Administration favoring Shia/Iranian power in the newly formed country. This started the ISIS blowback from the Sunni crowd in Iraq.

Now on to Syria - this is an offshoot of this Iranian power grab in Iraq. The Saudis (who are Sunni) started to fund ISIS/ISIS leaning groups to take a shot at Iranian/Hezbollah backed Syria. Our internal intelligence flipped internally on what to do - at first it was in - then stated we should be out because the "rebels" were Al-queda linked- in fact General Flynn is of this belief. But the Saudis pressed us and perhaps State/CIA/Obama/McCain felt the rebels needed to be backed.Even Republicans on the Hill were all over the place - some calling for the overthrow - some to stay out and Obama was going in without cover here. The delay in figuring this out allowed Assad to regroup and go in with Russia to fight back and that is short story today. Once again the Saudi Royal family has ####ed us or we ####ed ourselves because we are beholden to the Saudis in the region - and they own a crap load of US bonds and other investments- see Prince Alweed.  As for following through - it was lies just like Iraq that got us here. Embellished stories of rebel power from sycophants in the region and we jumped at a chance to rid the region of Assad. We thought we had a shot to take him down without a heavy involvement like Iraq - so why not?. Don't know what reputation you speak of - we are the United States and we lead the league in being ##### in the region - and we swing it around pretty bigly. . For 70 years we have abandoned our principles as a nation and totally jacked this area up - it's all on the scoreboard - the Shah, Mobarek, Sadat, Lebanon, Iraq, Iraq/Iran War in the 1980's. Kuwait, Libya  - you name we have done the bidding of the American multinationals and enriched Saudi princes. We sell war planes and weapons in the region and the CIA uses it as their playground - you and me  - we own Aleppo. We will own the coming war against the Kurds. We own it all - so we can have $2 gas. "We" suck.

 
The guy who currently heads the Department of Energy is Dr. Ernest Moniz who was previously a MIT professor and served as Head of the Department of Physics and as Director of the Bates Linear Accelerator Center. His principal research contributions have been in theoretical nuclear physics and in energy technology and policy studies.

The Department of Energy was recently tasked to modernize our existing stock pile of nuclear weapons to the tune of 400 billion or so. He was also overseeing Iran's nuclear program.

Here's the new guy

Clown

Great pick, donald!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
From the twitters:

Perrys Who Should Run the Department of Energy, Ranked:

1 - Matthew Perry

2 - Katy Perry

3 - Luke Perry

4 - Joe Perry

5 - Perry Farrell

6 - Steve Perry

7 - Perry Ellis

8 - Perry Como

9 - Tyler Perry

10 - William “The Refrigerator” Perry

11 - Gaylord Perry

12 - Perry Saturn

13 - Perry Jones III

14 - Being blown up by a nuclear ####### weapon

15 - Rick Perry

 
The General said:
The guy who currently heads the Department of Energy is Dr. Ernest Moniz who was previously a MIT professor and served as Head of the Department of Physics and as Director of the Bates Linear Accelerator Center. His principal research contributions have been in theoretical nuclear physics and in energy technology and policy studies.

The Department of Energy was recently tasked to modernize our existing stock pile of nuclear weapons to the tune of 400 billion or so. He was also overseeing Iran's nuclear program.

Here's the new guy

Clown

Great pick, donald!
Click to expand...
But you're not really giving him a chance. So unhinged. Sad and unfair.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm seeing rumors Trump will soon announce Jeb Bush As Secretary of Low Energy. It's pretty obvious Perry has got the high side covered.

 
Sand said:
Then why did we draw the line to begin with?  Why bother sticking our nose in when we had no intention of following through?  Why damage our reputation like that?

Still questions that have no good answers.  Easily the most embarrassing foreign policy decision over the last 8 years (not the worst - that goes to the creation of the power vacuum in Iraq with the pullout).
Click to expand...
Sand - here is an opinion piece from Dana Milbank on the wayback machine in 2013 - it outlines the problems we had uniting on this issue. Look at the comments especially - Obama haters saying stay out. Some neocon lovers say go in. Ryan was waffling, Inhofe, Rubio, Paul - they wanted it both ways and when Obama went to make a move they pulled the rug out from him. I would have preferred no move - but I'm a peace loving hippie Democrat who is tired of doing the bidding of the Saudi Royal Family. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-the-gop-wants-to-have-it-both-ways-on-syria/2013/09/03/a1755e36-14d3-11e3-880b-7503237cc69d_story.html?utm_term=.5254319939dd

 
After the Holocaust, the USA led the charge in telling the world "never again". We prosecuted war criminals at Nuremberg and we set the moral standard for international behavior. We signed the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and we pledged our national honor to use force if we had to to stop any future genocide. 

And yet we've failed again and again to keep our word on this. Cambodia. Ethiopia. The former Yugoslavia. Darfur. And now Aleppo.

Even now, we could raise 400,000 troops if we wanted to, send them to Aleppo, and stop this slaughter and save innocent lives. But we lack the will. 

Shame on us. 

 
timschochet said:
After the Holocaust, the USA led the charge in telling the world "never again". We prosecuted war criminals at Nuremberg and we set the moral standard for international behavior. We signed the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and we pledged our national honor to use force if we had to to stop any future genocide. 

And yet we've failed again and again to keep our word on this. Cambodia. Ethiopia. The former Yugoslavia. Darfur. And now Aleppo.

Even now, we could raise 400,000 troops if we wanted to, send them to Aleppo, and stop this slaughter and save innocent lives. But we lack the will. 

Shame on us. 
Click to expand...
Not 'even now.'

It's Russia's table now.

 
timschochet said:
After the Holocaust, the USA led the charge in telling the world "never again". We prosecuted war criminals at Nuremberg and we set the moral standard for international behavior. We signed the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and we pledged our national honor to use force if we had to to stop any future genocide. 

And yet we've failed again and again to keep our word on this. Cambodia. Ethiopia. The former Yugoslavia. Darfur. And now Aleppo.

Even now, we could raise 400,000 troops if we wanted to, send them to Aleppo, and stop this slaughter and save innocent lives. But we lack the will. 

Shame on us. 
Click to expand...
Any ideas on what Russia would do? They have a treaty to defend Syria. Think of this like a NATO agreement. You ready to go toe-to-toe? How many of the 400,000 are coming back in bodybags? All because we want to play games for the Saudis? Let's put this on them.

 
flapgreen said:
Oh let's don't do this.  You were never hopeful and had no intentions of ever approving of anything he did.  The guy isn't even President yet and you're saying he's unfit.  Give it up
Click to expand...
He is unfit. He's been unfit the entire time. He's done absolutely nothing to indicate he isn't unfit, and plenty to prove he is unfit just since the election. He'll continue to be unfit. It's obvious, but the clods wanted to have their little temper tantrum, so they elected an obviously unfit person to be President of the United States just to feel better about their shrinking place in the world. This is what you and the other clowns that voted for him signed up for, so yeah you're going to hear about it. You should be used to this concept, you're the nincompoop who started the "Obama is the worst President ever" thread. It's rich for you to whine about other people dishing it out when it's your unfit guy in office.

 
I believe even at this point if we told the Russians we are going in to save lives and stop the slaughter they would back off; they wouldn't risk a war with us over this. But I agree that we have already screwed up so much as to make it a risky proposition. 

But I hate that apparently Trump's intent is to abandon even what little remaining pretense we have of being a nation that upholds international morality. From now on it's going be "America First", whatever serves our interest and to hell with the rest of the world. American exceptionalism, the ideas and actions that made us the greatest nation in the history of mankind, appears to be gone. 

 
timschochet said:
I believe even at this point if we told the Russians we are going in to save lives and stop the slaughter they would back off; they wouldn't risk a war with us over this. But I agree that we have already screwed up so much as to make it a risky proposition. 

But I hate that apparently Trump's intent is to abandon even what little remaining pretense we have of being a nation that upholds international morality. From now on it's going be "America First", whatever serves our interest and to hell with the rest of the world. American exceptionalism, the ideas and actions that made us the greatest nation in the history of mankind, appears to be gone. 
Click to expand...
The USA and international morality -  :lmao:

It was gone a long long time ago

 
timschochet said:
I believe even at this point if we told the Russians we are going in to save lives and stop the slaughter they would back off; they wouldn't risk a war with us over this. But I agree that we have already screwed up so much as to make it a risky proposition. 

But I hate that apparently Trump's intent is to abandon even what little remaining pretense we have of being a nation that upholds international morality. From now on it's going be "America First", whatever serves our interest and to hell with the rest of the world. American exceptionalism, the ideas and actions that made us the greatest nation in the history of mankind, appears to be gone. 
Click to expand...
You're just wrong on Russia. And I'm sorry to bring it up but that No-Fly zone idea by Hillary was outright dangerous and unrealistic. There are so many problems with Bush/Obama but a huge one is that Russia essentially sits across a de facto alliance from Iran to Lebanon. We invited this in, and frankly it is no longer up to us, we do not have a seat at a table that we used to own.

 
I used to visit the City Lights Bookstore in San Francisco, which features a barrage of leftist books about our history. It seemed like every book in there discussed the terrible things we did: overthrowing Allende in Chile, overthrowing Mossedegh in Iran, supporting Batista in Cuba, etc. etc. Most of it was true, but it was terribly one sided; there seemed to never be any acknowledgment of the great stuff: how we liberated Europe from Nazi Germany, freed Asia from Imperial Japan, the Marshall Plan, the Berlin Airlift, etc. To the City Lights people, and Oliver Stone and Mother Jones and all of the other leftists, the United States was a caricature of her actual self, a villainous capitalist brute out to exploit the workers of the world. 

So I've always believed. Yet now we have chosen to elect as President a man who is the embodiment of the caricature the leftists always tried to present. Neither Richard Nixon nor Ronald Reagan came close to deserving the left's demonization of their presidencies, but it appears that Trump will. His cabinet picks represent every stereotype that the left uses to portray the USA. 

 
I'm obvioisly very liberal.   I don't want boots on the ground in Aleppo.

You clean the place up then they vote for Muslim Brotherhood.  I dont have kids but would not think it serves any purpose to send my brother there.

This is not Hitler invading Poland.

 
Daywalker said:
I'm obvioisly very liberal.   I don't want boots on the ground in Aleppo.

You clean the place up then they vote for Muslim Brotherhood.  I dont have kids but would not think it serves any purpose to send my brother there.

This is not Hitler invading Poland.
Click to expand...
That will be Russia's next move (not literally poland). 

 
timschochet said:
After the Holocaust, the USA led the charge in telling the world "never again". We prosecuted war criminals at Nuremberg and we set the moral standard for international behavior. We signed the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and we pledged our national honor to use force if we had to to stop any future genocide. 

And yet we've failed again and again to keep our word on this. Cambodia. Ethiopia. The former Yugoslavia. Darfur. And now Aleppo.

Even now, we could raise 400,000 troops if we wanted to, send them to Aleppo, and stop this slaughter and save innocent lives. But we lack the will. 

Shame on us. 
Click to expand...
Boom boom boom boom 

 
Sand said:
Absolutely.  Still incredibly mad about this.  We, and by "we" I mean this administration, drew a line in the sand and then promptly ignored it when Assad stepped over it and ceded all influence in the area to Russia.

Just shameful.
Click to expand...
You've made this argument on several occasions. I agree with you that the "line in the sand" thing was poor tactics by Obama. But in terms of his overall strategy, I'll ask again the basic question: what should we have done differently? I have yet to find a critic of Obama on Syria who is willing to answer this question. 

 
Skoo said:
You mean like appointing a SCOTUS when a sitting one dies?
Click to expand...
I don't think it's just on Obama. The entire West had the same response: this is really bad, but we don't really want to risk too much on Syria. Russia can have it. 

 
Daywalker said:
I'm obvioisly very liberal.   I don't want boots on the ground in Aleppo.

You clean the place up then they vote for Muslim Brotherhood.  I dont have kids but would not think it serves any purpose to send my brother there.

This is not Hitler invading Poland.
Click to expand...
I agree.  I strongly supported the Iraq invasion, largely on humanitarian grounds.  Not making that mistake again.

 
Leeroy Jenkins said:
Rick Perry. The best and the brightest in energy. 

Drain the swamp (so we can get to all the oil). 
Click to expand...
From Gizmodo

Perhaps most troubling, however, is that one the agency’s primary responsibilities is handling radioactive materials. Maintaining America’s nuclear arsenal, disposing of radioactive waste and producing nuclear reactors would all fall under Perry. The man currently holding the position is a former nuclear physicist. The man next in line for the job was last seen Dancing With the Stars.

 
My father in law knows Rex Tillerson. My FIL is a big shot in the Boy Scouts, and apparently Tillerson is too. From what I gather, Tillerson is a good, decent man. The ties to Russia are of concern. 

 
timschochet said:
You've made this argument on several occasions. I agree with you that the "line in the sand" thing was poor tactics by Obama. But in terms of his overall strategy, I'll ask again the basic question: what should we have done differently? I have yet to find a critic of Obama on Syria who is willing to answer this question. 
Click to expand...
This is the problem, nobody has a better solution.   We either watch innocent lives slaughtered or we have another 15 year involvement like we have in Afghanistan... or we poke Russia hard enough that we see the relative peace we've seen with them break down and we have another proxy war on our hands ala Vietnam or Afghanistan in the 80's

all options are bad 

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Yo Mama
**** OFFICIAL FFA 2025-2026 Fake NBA Draft **** - Happy Ranks-Giving!!
19 20 21
Replies
1K
Views
13K
Eephus
Eephus
DA RAIDERS
Pick a fantasy team for the Tour de France. There will be prizes!
Replies
35
Views
3K
DA RAIDERS
DA RAIDERS
kutta
***Official 2025 Footballguy T-Shirt Exchange - OCT 12 SHIPPING DEADLINE (extended 2 weeks)***
3 4 5
Replies
226
Views
6K
Dennis Castro
Dennis Castro

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top